the Long Parliament, whereby they might enjoy some measure of liberty of conscience.

In the dispute between Secretary Lewger and the Jesuits in Maryland, in 1639-40, he propounded the twenty cases of Canon Law to the Sacred College of the Propaganda for settlement and advice, and wrote the memorial, accompanying them, showing the injustice of the pretensions of the Secretary.

When Lord Baltimore in 1641 obtained permission to send the Jesuits home, he in 1642 prepared the second memorial to the Cardinal Prefect, and obtained a revocation of the order, so that some compromise might be agreed upon. If he did not prepare the articles of agreement, or the secret treaty, proposed to be entered into between the Society of Jesus, and the Barons of Baltimore, they were prepared with his knowledge and approbation. There is no doubt that he sought to have them executed.

He supported the Proprietary in his determination to exclude the Canon Law, as claimed by his subordinates in Maryland, and in enforcing the policy of the statutes of mortmain, and he executed the releases necessary to carry that policy out, and when the three propositions to Parliament in 1647, as a basis for obtaining civil and religious liberty were rejected, he, the head of the Society in England, familiar with the condition of Maryland, devoted to the prin

ciple of religious toleration, inherited from his illustrious ancestor, was of all men in the world, the proper person to be consulted by Lord Baltimore as to measures which should compose the difficulties between Protestant and Roman Catholic, between Jesuit and the Colonial authorities. His illustrious birth, his great authority, his known character and opinions, his efforts in favor of liberty of conscience, all point to him as the councillor and adviser of the Proprietary, in the difficult circumstances with which he was surrounded.

The great problem propounded to him by the Proprietary and by circumstances, was the preservation of the liberties of the province; of the rights of the Proprietary; of freedom of conscience; and the protection of the Roman Catholics and Jesuits from impending persecution. His solution of it was, the oaths, commissions and conditions of plantation, with the sixteen laws, to be passed without amendment or alteration.

First in importance of all these measures was the Act concerning Religion. If adopted, it would be a ratification by the freemen of the province of the original policy of the Proprietary on that subject. The ordinance of the Long Parliament of 1648, enforced conformity to the tenets of Puritanism under the penalty of death. The first section of the Maryland

Act of 1649, enforced conformity with the cardinal doctrines of Christianity, under the same penalty.

They are both laws to punish non-conformity.

But the first section of the Act, while in reality "an echo" of the ordinance, is inconsistent with the principles announced by the Proprietary in his first proclamation inviting settlers, as well as that made directly after the settlement, prohibiting "all unreasonable disputation in point of religion which tended to the disturbance of the peace and quiet of the Colony," and for infringing which, William Lewis was fined, and required to give security for his future good behavior, in 1638. It was most probably an amendment by the Assembly to the Bill sent out by Lord Baltimore. That amendments were made to these bills is certain.

Baltimore, in 1650, assented to the seven laws passed in 1649, and such assent was unnecessary, unless they had been amended, for he had agreed to them beforehand, if passed without amendment. In his letter to Governor Stone of August 26, 1651, he says expressly, that as to certain laws passed by the Assembly, "We for their full satisfaction sent last year, our assent with such alterations as they themselves desired."

1 Assembly Proceedings, 1637 to 1658, p. 424.

The first section to enforce conformity, embodying a Puritan principle, enforced by the Ordinance of 1648, was therefore most probably an addition by the Assembly to the original draft. The remaining sections of the Act only carry out the policy of the proclamation against "unreasonable disputations in point of religion which tend to the disturbance of the peace and quiet of the colony."

1

These provisions are but "an echo" of the laws of Utopia, as portrayed by Sir Thomas More.

That description "of the best state of a commonwealth" was intended to express the views of the philosophers of the New Learning, as to the principles which should control, and of the policy which should direct an ideal State.

It was an expression of the reflections of Erasmus and More, and of their conclusions as to what institutions would be best adapted to promote the welfare and happiness of mankind, and the strength and perpetuity of a people.

Under the guise of the description of the imaginary island of "Nowhere," More sets forth his ideas of the social economy, and of the political arrangements, necessary to constitute "the best commonwealth." It contains more than suggestions of social problems, hardly as yet settled, and still under discussion.

1 Bozman, p. 674.

All citizens labored in Utopia, and none more than nine hours a day; slavery, except for crime or for prisoners taken in war, was prohibited; lawyers were not allowed. They abhorred war, and community of goods, of labor, and of meals was practiced. The religious institutions of the ideal State were exactly such as Baltimore founded in Maryland.

"There be divers kindes of religion, not only in sondrie partes of the Islande, but also in divers places in every citie. Some worship for God the sonne, some the moon, some some other of

the planettes.

"They received the Christian religion with gladness, but they would not allow unreasonable disputations concerning it.

They also, which do not agree to Christ's religion, feare no man frome it, nor speake against any man that hath received it, saving that one of our company, in my presence, was sharply punished. He, as soone as he was baptised, began, against our willes, with more earneste affection than wisdome, to reason of Christe's religion, and began to waxe so hote in his matter, that he did not onlye preferre our religion before al other, but also did utterly despise and condempne all other, calling them prophane, and the followers of them wicked and develish, and the children of everlasting dampnation.

"When he had thus long reasoned the matter, they laide hold on him, accused him, and condemned him into exile, not as a despiser of religion, but as a sedicious person, and a raiser up of dissention amonge the people.

"For this is one of the anncientest lawes amonge them, that no man shall be blamed for resoninge in the maintenance of his owne religion. For Kynge Utopus, even at the first beginning, hearing that the inhabitantes of the land were, before his coming